←back to thread

427 points JumpCrisscross | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
ameister14 ◴[] No.41897589[source]
The article mentions 'responsible' grammarly usage, which I think is an oxymoron in an undergraduate or high school setting. Undergrad and high school is where you learn to write coherently. Grammarly is a tool that actively works against that goal because it doesn't train students to fix the grammatical mistakes, it just fixes it for them and they become steadily worse (and less detail oriented) writers.

I have absolutely no problem using it in a more advanced field where the basics are already done and the focus is on research, for example, but at lower levels I'd likely consider it dishonest.

replies(1): >>41897755 #
borski ◴[] No.41897755[source]
My wife is dyslexic; grammarly makes suggestions, but it doesn’t fix it for her. Perhaps that’s a feature she doesn’t have turned on?

She loves it. It doesn’t cause her to be any less attentive to her writing; it just makes it possible to write.

replies(2): >>41900177 #>>41902285 #
ameister14 ◴[] No.41900177[source]
>It doesn’t cause her to be any less attentive to her writing; it just makes it possible to write.

I was not really referring to accommodations under the ADA. For people that do not require accommodations, the use of them is unfair to their classmates and can be detrimental to their ability to perform without them in the future, as there is no requirement to have the accommodations available to them. This is not the case for someone with dyslexia.

replies(1): >>41900901 #
1. borski ◴[] No.41900901[source]
Fair, I can see why it looks like I confused them. I was solely using her an example; my point is that grammarly hasn’t caused her knowledge of grammar to get worse, only better. It has taught her over time.